Allahabad Court March 1912 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Dwarka Das Vs. Debi Dayal Tewari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1912
Reported in: 14Ind.Cas.303
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for pre emption. The plaintiff is a 03 sharer. The defendant-vendee is a stranger. The plaintiff adduced in evidence the Wanb-ul-arz of 1880. That document contains a referenda to a right of pre-emption, and according to the ruling of this Courts a reference in a Wajrb-id-arz to pre-emptive rights must be taken primi facie, to be a reference to a custom of pre-emption rather than to an arrangement between the co-sharers. Both the Courts below have quoted from this Wajib ul-arz. It appears that the word 'sale' was omitted and the Court of first instance attached considerable importance to the omission of this word. We think the lower Appellate Court was right in holding that the omission of the word 'sale' was accidental. Consequently, the Wajib-ul-arz produced by the plaintiff was evidence of the existence of a custom of preemption. The plaintiff, however, produced two witnesses in support of his case. One of the witnesses, a co-sharer himself, state...
Nehora Pande Vs. Inderjit Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1912
Reported in: 14Ind.Cas.327
1. The case of the defendants-respondents is singularly devoid of merit. The suit was a suit for pre-emption. The consideration for the sale was Rs. 900 but there were outstanding incumbrances to the extent of Rs. 624-8 which the vendee was bound to discharge. The Court of first instance decreed the plaintiff's claim, but overlooking the fact that there were incumbrances, which the vendee was bound to discharge, it ordered the plaintiff pre-emptor to deposit the whole Rs. 900 for payment to the vendee. If the matter had stood there, the result would be that the plaintiff would get the property subject to its incumbrances which he would be bound to discharge, while the vendee would get the price which Vie was to pay not for the encumbered property but for the property unencumbered. The vendee appealed against the decree for preemption. The plaintiff filed objections contending that he ought not to be called upon to deposit the whole Rs. 900. The appellant withdrew his appeal. As the law...
Ramanand Vs. Harjas and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1912
Reported in: 14Ind.Cas.572
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption. The plaintiff based his right both on the grounds of an existing arrangement between the co-sharers and also on the existence of a custom of pre-emption giving him a right. At the trial it would seem that the claim was practically confined to a claim based upon custom. There was mention made of pre-emption in the wajib-ul-arz of 1867, and in the later wajib-ul-arz of 1886, there is a statement 'for other customs see the wajib-ul-arz of 1867'. We do not think that this so called incorporation of the earlier wajib-ul-arz by the later one carries the plaintiff's case very far in so far as it is based on village arrangement. The later wajib-ul-arz says 'for other customs see the earlier wajib-ul-arz'. It comes to this that the case resls on the issue 'does or does not, a custom of pre-emption alleged by the plaintiff exist amongst the co-sharers'. The sole evidence adduced by the plaintiffs were the two wajib-ul-araiz already mentioned. ...
Ghulam Nasir-ud-dIn and anr. Vs. Hardeo Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1912
Reported in: (1912)ILR34All436
George Knox and Griffin, JJ.1. The North-Western Bank Company, Limited, obtained a decree against four persons--Hamza Ali Khan, Khwaja Ghulam Nasir-ud-din Khan, Musammat Aghai Begam and Mogal Jan, judgment-debtors, on the 24th of December, 1897. Hamza Ali Khan died and Faiz-ud-din, Aftab Ali and the three remaining original debtors have been put on the record as his heirs. An appeal was filed to this Court and that appeal was decided on the 7th of February, 1900. The decree passed by the Subordinate Judge of Meerut was to a certain extent modified. Execution appears to have been first taken out on the 15th of January,1898. Several other applications in execution followed. One of these was an application for execution made in the court of the District Judge of Delhi on the 8th of July, 1904. This application was made within time, and, as a result, some property situated in Delhi was attached as the property of Aghai Begam, judgment-debtor. Upon attachment, two persons, Hafiz Khairati an...
Sheo Dayal Singh Vs. Ganga and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1912
Reported in: 14Ind.Cas.324
Henry Richards, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit in which the plaintiff sought to eject the defendant from the possession of a certain house. The house in question is a small house, one of a large number of similar houses in one compound in Aligarh. It appeared to be admitted that the plaintiff is the zemindar of the mohalla in which the compound is situate. The learned Judge says that, in a general way, he has established his title to the compound and to the houses in that compound, though not to the particular house which is the subject-matter of the present suit. This particular house was at one time occupied by a man called Pita. He was succeeded by his son, and after the death of Pita and his son, the widow of Pita sold it to the defendant Muhammad Yusuf. It seems to me that the zemindar is presumably the owner of the houses and the sites of the houses within the zemindari. Of course, it is open to the occupiers to show that a custom exists giving them rights more or less e...
Ghulam Nasir-ud-dIn and anr. Vs. Hardeo Parsad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1912
Reported in: 14Ind.Cas.343
1. The North-Western Bank Company, Limited, obtained a decree against four persons, Hamza Ali Khan, Khaja Ghulam Nasir-ud din Khan, Musammat Aga Begamand Moghul Jani, judgment-debtors, on December 1897. Hamza Ali Khan died and Paizud-din, Afzal Ali and the three remaining original debtors have been put on the record as his heirs. An appeal was filed to this Court and that appeal was decided on February 7th, 1900. The decree passed by the Subordinate Judge of Meerut was to a certain extent modified. Execution appears to have been first taken out on January 15th, 1898. Several other applications in execution followed, One of these was an application for execution made in the Court of the District Judge of Delhi on July 8fch,1904. This application was made within time and as a result some property situated in Delhi was attached as the property of Aga Begam, judgment-debtor. Upon attachment, two persons, Hafiz Khairati and Hafiz Ahmed Husain, objected. The objection filed by them was rejec...
Ram Sarup Vs. Kalla and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1912
Reported in: 14Ind.Cas.570a
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for sale on the basis of a mortgage-deed, dated 26fch November 1877, in favour of one Angad The plaintiffs are related to Angad and claimed to have been joint with him and owners by survivorship. The present appellant is a transferee of the mortgaged properly. He pleaded that the plaintiffs were not joint with Angad, that the latter had been separate and had left other heirs as well as the plaintiffs and the latter alone were not entitled to sue. The other heirs of Angad were made parties to the suit but the period of limitation had then expired.2. The first Court held against the plaintiffs on the question of jointness and, in the circumstances of the case, dismissed the suit.3. The plaintiffs appealed. In the meanwhile, they applied under the Succession Certificate Act and when the appeal has come up for hearing, the certificate had been granted conditional on security being furnished. The security at that time had not been given to the satisfactio...
Lachman Das and anr. Vs. Mohan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1912
Reported in: 14Ind.Cas.582
George Knox, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by Lachman Das and Tota Ram win describe themselves as owners and zemindars of a certain village in pargana Koil. They state that there are trees standing on a plot owned and possessed by them, and that the defendants, without any right to do so, have wrongly cut down a nim tree of the value of Rs. 20 and intend to out down the rest. They pray that a decree may issue for Rs. 20 as the price of the said tree and further that an injunction may be issued prohibiting the defendants from cutting down the trees in future. The written statement of the defendants says that the land on which the trees in question stand, together with other lands, was in the possession of themselves and their ancestors as their khud kasht land. The grove of which the tree cut down formed one was planted by them. A partition took place in 1893 in which the defendants were entered as ex-proprietary tenants of the land on which the trees stand. The M...
Makund Ram Vs. Girdhari Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-25-1912
Reported in: 14Ind.Cas.277
1. A simple money-decree was obtained on December 4th, 1896. After various applications for execution, an application for the transfer of the decree to the Court of the Munsif of Haveli was made, on December 2nd, 1898, and the application, out of which this appeal arises, was filed in the Court of the Munsif of Haveli on February 15th, 1909, that is twelve years after the date of the decree. The judgment-debtor resisted the application on the ground that it was barred by the twelve years' rate of limitation. The Court of first instance gave effect to that plea and rejected the application for execution. On appeal, the order of the first Court was confirmed by the Court of first appeal. In second appeal, it is argued that the application for execution was in continuation of the application for transfer and that, therefore, it was not barred by time. We, in Khetpal Singh v. Tikam Singh 9 A.L.J. 365 : 14 Ind. Cas. 172 held that an application for execution cannot be an application in cont...
Mawasi Vs. Mul Chand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1912
Reported in: (1912)ILR34All434
Henry Richards, C.J. and Tudball, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption. The plaintiff is the owner of two small plots of land which are not assessed for Government revenue. The plots held by the plaintiff appear in the same khewat as the land which goes to make up a 20 biswaa mahal. To this extent and no further can it be said that the plaintiff is a proprietor in the mahal in which the property sold is situate. The 20 bighas, 3 biswas and 7 biswansis do not go to make up the 20 biswas share set forth in the khewat. The only evidence adduced by the plaintiff in support of the existence of a custom of pre-emption is the wajib-ul-arz. The wajib-ul-arz for mahal Chhidu is as follows :-' In this mahal if the owner of a share wish to sell it, he shall do so first to his near relation, who may be a co-sharer in the zamindari, and in case of his refusal to anyone he likes. The wajib-ul-arz for mahal Roti Ram is in similar terms. Now the custom which the plaintiff attempts to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »